Tor

Tor is an encrypted anonymising network that makes it harder to intercept internet communications, or see where communications are coming from or going to.

In order to use the WikiLeaks public submission system as detailed above you can download the Tor Browser Bundle, which is a Firefox-like browser available for Windows, Mac OS X and GNU/Linux and pre-configured to connect using the anonymising system Tor.

Tails

If you are at high risk and you have the capacity to do so, you can also access the submission system through a secure operating system called Tails. Tails is an operating system launched from a USB stick or a DVD that aim to leaves no traces when the computer is shut down after use and automatically routes your internet traffic through Tor. Tails will require you to have either a USB stick or a DVD at least 4GB big and a laptop or desktop computer.

Tips

Our submission system works hard to preserve your anonymity, but we recommend you also take some of your own precautions. Please review these basic guidelines.

1. Contact us if you have specific problems

If you have a very large submission, or a submission with a complex format, or are a high-risk source, please contact us. In our experience it is always possible to find a custom solution for even the most seemingly difficult situations.

2. What computer to use

If the computer you are uploading from could subsequently be audited in an investigation, consider using a computer that is not easily tied to you. Technical users can also use Tails to help ensure you do not leave any records of your submission on the computer.

3. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

After

1. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

2. Act normal

If you are a high-risk source, avoid saying anything or doing anything after submitting which might promote suspicion. In particular, you should try to stick to your normal routine and behaviour.

3. Remove traces of your submission

If you are a high-risk source and the computer you prepared your submission on, or uploaded it from, could subsequently be audited in an investigation, we recommend that you format and dispose of the computer hard drive and any other storage media you used.

In particular, hard drives retain data after formatting which may be visible to a digital forensics team and flash media (USB sticks, memory cards and SSD drives) retain data even after a secure erasure. If you used flash media to store sensitive data, it is important to destroy the media.

If you do this and are a high-risk source you should make sure there are no traces of the clean-up, since such traces themselves may draw suspicion.

4. If you face legal action

If a legal action is brought against you as a result of your submission, there are organisations that may help you. The Courage Foundation is an international organisation dedicated to the protection of journalistic sources. You can find more details at https://www.couragefound.org.

Submit documents to WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks publishes documents of political or historical importance that are censored or otherwise suppressed. We specialise in strategic global publishing and large archives.

The following is the address of our secure site where you can anonymously upload your documents to WikiLeaks editors. You can only access this submissions system through Tor. (See our Tor tab for more information.) We also advise you to read our tips for sources before submitting.

wlupld3ptjvsgwqw.onion

Copy this address into your Tor browser. Advanced users, if they wish, can also add a further layer of encryption to their submission using our public PGP key.

If you cannot use Tor, or your submission is very large, or you have specific requirements, WikiLeaks provides several alternative methods. Contact us to discuss how to proceed.

United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services (UN OIOS) 22 Jun 2005 report titled "Audit of Operations in Germany [AR2005-121-01]" relating to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The report runs to 9 printed pages.

Simple text version follows

UNITED NATIONS
Office of Internal Oversight Services
UNHCR Audit Service
Assignment: AR2005/121/01 22 June 2005
Audit Report: R05/R011
AUDIT OF UNHCR OPERATIONS IN GERMANY
Auditor:
Theodor Ludviksson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES
Office of Internal Oversight Services
UNHCR Audit Service
AUDIT OF UNHCR OPERATIONS IN GERMANY (AR2005/121/01)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In April 2005, OIOS conducted an audit of UNHCR Operations in Germany. The audit covered
activities with a total expenditure over US$ 1.0 million in 2003 and 2004. A summary of
preliminary findings and recommendations was shared with the Representative in April 2005, on
which comments were received by May 2005. No additional comments were received on a draft
audit report issued in June 2005. The Representative has accepted the recommendations made and
is in the process of implementing them.
Overall Assessment
� OIOS assessed the UNHCR Operation in Germany as above average. Overall, it was well
managed, and although the need for minor adjustments in the application of internal controls
was identified, they were not sufficiently critical to compromise the overall system of
internal control.
Programme Management
� The refugee programme in Germany is very small, with only three low value sub-agreements
in 2004. A short visit to the largest implementing partner confirmed adequate record keeping
and only a minor issue on completing the final SPMR was discussed and properly dealt with.
� Some fifty years ago, UNHCR provided housing loans totalling some US$ 7.4 million to
building societies and individual refugees for the construction of some 4,000 housing units
for refugees. As of December 2004, the outstanding loan balances amounted to some US$
690,000 and the last repayment will not be due until 2017. As the responsibility for the loan
recoveries was transferred from UNHCR Germany to UNHCR Treasury Section some years
ago, very limited information was available at the Representation in Berlin; files at the
Treasury Section did not provide much details either. A number of issues, such as the
continued use of the UNHCR funded housing units for refugees, needs to be clarified. The
Representation has agreed to gather information on the status of the loans, their
management with four repayment-collecting agencies in Germany as well as the viability to
continue using the housing units for refugees in future. The results from that information
gathering should be shared with Treasury.
� The government statistics on refugees and asylum seekers were rather general, lacking details
that would be helpful to identify persons under UNHCR's mandate as well as vulnerable
groups in need of assistance. The relevant Government Office in charge of compiling and
maintaining such population figures is updating its system and reviewing data. It is
estimated that the work may take up to two years.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Security and Safety
� No particular concerns on Security and Safety were identified at the UNHCR Offices in
Germany, except that a protective film on windows should be considered.
Administration
� In the areas of administration and finance, the UNHCR Offices in Germany complied with
UNHCR's regulations, rules, policies and procedures and controls were operating effectively
during the period under review. Only minor issues were raised, including certain
improvements in asset management and meeting deadlines on Performance Appraisal
Reporting.
June 2005
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER Paragraphs
I. INTRODUCTION 1-3
II. AUDIT OBJECTIVES 4
III. AUDIT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 5-7
IV. AUDIT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Review of Implementing Partners 8 - 10
B. Housing loans 11 - 16
C. Refugee statistics 17 - 19
D. Private Sector Fund Raising 20
E. Security and Safety 21 � 22
E. Administration 23 - 26
V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 27
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. INTRODUCTION
1. From 18 to 26 April 2005, OIOS conducted an audit of UNHCR's Operations in
Germany. The audit was conducted in accordance with the International Standards for the
Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. OIOS reviewed the activities of the UNHCR
Representation in Germany and its Liaison Office in Nurnberg. There have not been any
oversight reviews of the UNHCR Programme in Germany for many years.
2. UNHCR has been present in Germany for over 50 years. In recent years UNHCR has
worked with the Government and monitored local refugee and asylum seekers issues, mainly
along its protection mandate. UNHCR had planed to close its Liaison Office in Nurnberg, but
Germany has earmarked funds to keep the Liaison Office operational in view of its close
working relations with Government offices.
3. The findings and recommendations contained in this report have been discussed with
the officials responsible for the audited activities during the exit conference held on 25 April
2005. A summary of preliminary findings and recommendations was shared with the
Representative in May 2005. His comments, which were received in May 2005, are reflected
in this report. No additional comments were received on a draft audit report that was shared
with the Director, Bureau for Europe and the Representative. The Representative has
accepted the audit recommendations made and is in the process of implementing them.
II. AUDIT OBJECTIVES
4. The main objectives of the audit were to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of
controls to ensure:
� Reliability and integrity of financial and operational information;
� Effectiveness and efficiency of operations;
� Safeguarding of assets; and,
� Compliance with regulations and rules, Letters of Instruction and Sub-agreements.
III. AUDIT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
5. The audit focused on 2003 and 2004 programme activities under project
AB/GRF/LS/400 with expenditure of some US$ 500,000. Our review concentrated on the
activities performed at the Representation in Berlin and at the Liaison Office in Nurnberg. A
short visit was paid to a local Implementing Partner. We also reviewed activities self-
implemented by the Representation, mainly public information activities with expenditure of
US$ 170,000.
6. The audit reviewed the administration of the Representation Office in Berlin and the
Liaison Office in Nurnberg with annual administrative budgets totalling some US$ 300,000
and assets with an acquisition value of some US$ 180,000 and a current value of some US$
30,000. The number of staff working for the UNHCR Operation in Germany was 12 under
the staffing table, two part-timers worked on Durable Solutions mainly for Afghanis and
Iraqis (paid from temporary funds from UNHCR CASWANAME) and one person, who
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2
assisted occasionally with meeting individual asylum seekers, was paid on hourly basis.
7. The audit activities included a review and assessment of internal control systems,
interviews with staff, analysis of applicable data and a review of the available documents and
other relevant records, in Berlin, Nurnberg and at Headquarters.
IV. AUDIT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Review of Implementing Partners
8. The UNHCR programme in Germany is rather small implementing one project
AB/AB/GRF/LS/400. Main activities related to protection and public information, of which
some US$ 120,000 was spent in 2004 under self-implementation. US$ 54,000 (Euro 43,000)
was implemented under a sub-agreement with Bundesfachverband UMF (BUMF).
9. A short visit was paid to the BUMF office in Nurnberg, which started working with
UNHCR in 2004 to assist children and adolescents. BUMF activities under the UNHCR sub-
project were also funded by various other agencies. Confirmation of an adequate accounting
system and general internal controls was obtained through an interview with the Director of
BUMF and by browsing through vouchers and financial reports. The accounts were
maintained by an accounting firm and audited by an audit firm.
10. Our review assessed the arrangements as adequate, except that the final SPMR
included not only UNHCR funds but also all the funds that BUMF had received for these
refugee related activities, totalling some Euro 127,000. OIOS recommended that BUMF
should adjust the final 2004 SPMR to limit the reporting to the use of UNHCR funds only.
The Representation has informed OIOS that an updated SPMR has been submitted for
reporting exclusively on UNHCR funds.
B. Housing loans
11. Between 1955 and 1967, interest-free housing loans totalling some DM 30 million
(US$ 7.4 million) were granted from UN and UNHCR funds for the construction of some
4,000 housing units for refugees. These loans were granted mainly to "housing/building
societies", but also to individual refugees. As the repayment periods were set for 50 years,
most of these loans are still partially outstanding. As at 31 December 2004, about 550,000
(US$ 690,000) was still outstanding for collection and the last repayments will not become
due until 2017.
12. Some years ago, the responsibility for these loans was transferred from the UNHCR
Representation in Germany to the Treasury Section at Headquarters. Therefore, only limited
information was available at the Representation on the loans, such as initial granting
conditions and subsequent collection management, as well as the level of compliance with
any statutory requirements associated with the loans.
13. Initially, the UNHCR Representation in Germany managed the loans and the
repayments with the assistance of four agencies in different locations in West Germany
(Berlin, Nurnberg, Bonn and Stuttgart). Later the agencies took full responsibility for the
collection of repayments on behalf of UNHCR. Once a year they reported the refunds to
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3
UNHCR Treasury Section (copy to the Representation) and made corresponding payments
into a bank account under the responsibility of UNHCR Headquarters.
14. Various concerns and questions came up after this initial review that need to be
considered. For example, the status of the loans is reported in Note 12 to the UNHCR
Financial Statements and will continue until 2017. However, there has been no independent
confirmation nor audited statements to confirm the correctness of the remaining loan
balances.
15. According to the loan conditions, the housing units were to be used exclusively by
refugees. One of the agencies explained that as the loans were subject to local government
registration along with the properties, the requirement for refugee occupation was considered
mandatory for the initial 50 years, even if the loans were paid up before the final due date.
However, it was not possible to confirm that the conditions initially set for granting the loans
were still honoured. Further, it was unclear whether the requirement for refugee occupation
would end upon the full repayment of the loans.
16. The agencies retained 12.5 per cent fees from the regular collection and 3 per cent of
the loan balance if they were paid up before final due date. OIOS noted that the agency in
Nurnberg was one of the main borrowers itself. Therefore the question arises whether the 12.5
per cent collection fee should apply if the agency is "collecting" funds from itself.
Recommendation:
The UNHCR Representation in Germany should gather
detailed information of the loan conditions and their legal
status under local housing legislation. In case refugees could
still benefit from this housing assistance in future, a feasible
management arrangement needs to be put in place. (Rec. 01)
The Representation has already planned visits to the agencies managing the loans to assess
the present situation on collections and the number and other details of the still outstanding
loans. A mission report expected towards the end of third quarter 2005 should be shared with
Treasury Section. OIOS expects such a report to highlight details on the present situation of
the loans and to consider if any future benefits can be expected from the housing units for
refugee assistance in Germany.
C. Refugee statistics
17. For years, government statistics on refugees and asylum seekers showed their numbers
as having been well over one million. By December 2003 it had fallen to some 900,000. By
end April 2005, updated figures were not yet available for 2004. As a result, UNHCR
planning figures for 2006 had to be based on 2003 data. Also, various details on the figures
were not available at the Representation, for confirming the actual number the UNHCR
mandated refugees and asylum seekers in Germany.
18. The largest group listed with the Government refugee statistics was 416,000 "de-facto
refugees" or asylum seekers who were allowed to stay temporary in Germany without being
granted refugee status. The Representation estimated that about half of them could fall under
its mandate. It was not known how many persons from various old caseloads were still listed
there, for instance, whether any refugees who had benefited from the housing loans (some 50
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
years ago) were still included, or how many persons from countries that had recently joined
the EU were still included in the refugee statistics.
19. OIOS understands that the Government authority in charge of the refugee statistics is
updating their systems and more detailed information may be available in future. By
obtaining more information on the refugee figures, UNHCR should be able to focus its work
more on any needs with vulnerable groups.
Recommendations:
The UNHCR Representation in Germany should endeavour
to gather more details from the Government on the refugee
population in order to determine more accurately the groups
and individuals under UNHCR's mandate. (Rec. 02)
The Representative stated that this matter has been of concern to UNHCR and the
Government. The German authority in charge of compiling and maintaining such refugees
statistics has confirmed that a comprehensive review of the system is being performed. It
may, however, take up to two years but significant changes are expected in the numbers. The
Representation will inform OIOS as soon as updated information is made available.
D. Private Sector Fund Raising
20. UNHCR signed recently an MOU with Deutsche Stiftung fur UNO-Fluchtlingshilfe
(DSUF) for fund raising activities in Germany. All income at DSUF is used for refugee
related matters, of which UNHCR HQ received about two-thirds, amounting to some US$ 1.5
million in 2004. Direct mailing appeals turned out to be the most effective approach in
Germany. Special events generated much less income, however, even the least profitable ones
could be considered as having raised public awareness. The Representation worked closely
with DSUF and a UNHCR staff member was on its management board. OIOS has no audit
comments on this area.
E. Security and Safety
21. A general review of the security and safety matters at the Representation in Berlin did
not reveal any particular concerns. In addition to a general reception for the building on the
ground floor, a two-door "security entrance" limits the access to the office area on the 2nd
floor. The Liaison Office in Nurnberg is located within a Government building, which is very
well protected.
22. OIOS suggested, however, that the Representation in Berlin consider installing a
protective film on windows, preferably at the front of the building facing the road, which
would reduce the scattering of glass in case of any incidents. The Representation agreed and
has started preparations for cost estimates and obtaining the landlord's approval.
F. Administration
23. In the areas of administration and finance, the UNHCR Representation in Berlin
complied with UNHCR's regulations, rules, policies and procedures and controls were
operating effectively during the period under review. The Representation in Berlin covered
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5
most of the administrative and financial needs of the Liaison Office in Nurnberg, which
operated on a petty cash basis. Following are descriptions of some of the issues that were
discussed.
24. Asset management needed some improvement. Some data entries to AssetTrak
needed to be completed and the inventory lists for new purchases (such as computer
equipment in 2004) needed to be updated. Also, the disposal process for items no longer
needed, many of them at the Liaison Office, had yet to be completed. OIOS was satisfied that
steps were being taken to deal with these matters.
25. The 2004 Performance Appraisal Reports (PAR) for three staff members had not been
completed at the time of the audit. OIOS also noted some delay in setting the 2005
objectives. The Representation explained that the remaining 2004 PARs were being finalized.
For the setting of the 2005 objectives an office retreat was being organized for harmonizing
them for all staff along the goals for the 2006 Country Operational Plan, which was only
completed towards end of March 2005. Since the performance period is based on the
calendar year, the 2005 objective setting in Germany will be very close to the mid-term
review. This may diminish the value of the mid-term review.
26. A suggestion from OIOS to prepare and keep updated travel plans for the office was
well received and acted upon. Some financial and accounting issues were discussed with the
Admin/Finance Assistant and OIOS is satisfied with the actions taken. Such issues related to
providing more complete information on hospitality claims and that the Representative should
not certify or approve payments for himself.
V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
27. I wish to express my appreciation for the assistance and cooperation extended to the
auditor by the staff of UNHCR in Germany.
Egbert C. Kaltenbach, Chief
UNHCR Audit Service
Office of Internal Oversight Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------